DOCSLIB.ORG

Reply Comments of America’S Power Regarding the Commission’S Proposed Policy Statement

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Reply Comments of America’S Power Regarding the Commission’S Proposed Policy Statement UNITED STATES OF AMERICA BEFORE THE FEDERAL ENERGY REGULATORY COMMISSION Carbon Pricing in FERC-Jurisdictional ) Organized Regional Wholesale Electric ) Docket No. AD20-14-000 Energy Markets ) REPLY COMMENTS OF AMERICA’S POWER REGARDING THE COMMISSION’S PROPOSED POLICY STATEMENT SUMMARY OF REPLY COMMENTS America’s Power submits these Reply Comments following the Initial Comments that were filed by at least 70 parties, including America’s Power, in response to the Commission’s Proposed Policy Statement on Carbon Pricing in Organized Wholesale Electricity Markets (“Policy Proposal”). i Our Initial Comments urged the Commission to withdraw its Policy Proposal and terminate Docket No. AD20-14-000. One of our major concerns is that the Commission’s statement of “encouragement” to consider carbon pricing could be misconstrued as a signal that states should adopt carbon prices and enable grid operators to submit new market rules for FERC approval. Such a signal would exceed FERC’s authority. On the other hand, if the Commission finalizes its Policy Statement, our Initial Comments urged the Commission to clarify its intent ii and to take into account certain considerations when reviewing carbon pricing proposals from ISOs/RTOs. iii After reviewing the Initial Comments of other parties, we continue to urge the Commission to withdraw its Policy Proposal and terminate the docket. However, we have modified our recommendation. Our recommendation now is that the Commission — • Withdraw the Policy Proposal and terminate the docket, as we urged the Commission to do in our Initial Comments; • Wait a reasonable period of time to see what steps the Biden Administration undertakes to address carbon emissions, especially steps that it might take to decarbonize the electric sector by 2035; • Then decide what, if any, FERC actions or policies might be necessary in light of the new Administration’s carbon and infrastructure policies; and • In the meantime, schedule another technical conference or roundtable (a) to provide an opportunity for other parties —especially states, electricity consumers, and coal interests —to provide adequate input and (b) to address issues that need further discussion in light of Initial Comments and Reply Comments. INTERESTS OF AMERICA’S POWER America’s Power advocates on behalf of coal-fueled electricity, the nation’s coal fleet, and the coal supply chain. Our membership is comprised of electricity generators, coal producers, railroads, barge operators, and equipment manufacturers that are involved in generating electricity from coal. The attributes of the nation’s coal fleet make it a critical part of the electricity grid. Despite these attributes, some 173,100 megawatts (MW) of coal-fueled generation have retired or announced plans to retire. Of this nationwide total, more than 110,000 MW will have retired in ISO/RTO regions by the end of 2030. We are deeply worried that carbon pricing would accelerate coal retirements, thereby causing the premature loss of the reliability, resilience, fuel security, and affordability attributes provided by the coal fleet. As expressed in our Initial Comments, we are concerned that the Commission’s Policy Proposal might be misconstrued as an indication that it favors the adoption of carbon pricing by ISOs/RTOs. Initial Comments filed by many parties indicated that carbon pricing was strictly a matter for each state to decide. As the Commission knows, 39 states do not have a carbon price, but a number of them have programs or goals to either explicitly promote clean energy or explicitly reduce carbon emissions. OPENING PANDORA’S BOX With a few exceptions, most commenters agreed that FERC has the authority to review proposals from ISOs/RTOs that incorporate carbon pricing. At the same time, commenters indicated that the Commission should not prejudge whether any such proposals fall within the Commission’s jurisdiction. After that area of apparent consensus, the comments diverge and are often contradictory. We catalogued a number of concerns that were raised by one or more commenters, which suggest to us that the Commission has acted prematurely to open a Pandora’s Box without seemingly considering the possibility, if not likelihood, of new Administration carbon policies that could undermine the basis for the Policy Proposal. These include, but are not limited to, the issues listed below in alphabetical order: • Carbon pricing in relation to other state programs that also reduce carbon emissions. See, e.g., “COMMENTS OF PUBLIC INTEREST ORGANIZATIONS,” November 16, 2020. • Cost of paying for stranded investments and replacement resources if carbon pricing makes existing resources uneconomic. See, e.g., “COMMENTS AND MOTION TO INTERVENE OF EAST KENTUCKY POWER COOPERATIVE, INC.,” November 16, 2020. - 2 - • “Double payment” caused by adopting carbon pricing in addition to already-existing programs. See, e.g., “Comments by the American Petroleum Institute,” November 16, 2020. • Effects of carbon pricing on consumer costs and the affordability of electricity, especially for lower income consumers. See, e.g., “COMMENTS AND MOTION TO INTERVENE OF EAST KENTUCKY POWER COOPERATIVE, INC.,” November 16, 2020. • Effects of carbon pricing on the electrification of other sectors of the economy. See e.g., “COMMENTS OF CALPINE CORPORATION ON PROPOSED POLICY STATEMENT,” November 16, 2020. • Effects of ISO/RTO carbon pricing on jurisdictions that are not included within RTOs or ISOs. See, e.g., “COMMENTS OF THE CANADIAN ELECTRICITY ASSOCIATION IN RESPONSE TO NOTICE OF INQUIRY,” November 16. • Flaws with the social cost of carbon as a metric to price carbon emissions. See, e.g., “Comments of the Competitive Enterprise Institute,” November 11, 2020. • Ineffectiveness of carbon pricing in achieving emission reductions. See, e.g., Comments filed by Americans for Prosperity, et al, November 16, 2020. • Insignificance of emission reductions achieved by carbon pricing. For example, see next section of our comments below titled “Carbon Emissions in Perspective.” • Lack of input by individual states that do not price carbon. See, e.g., “COMMENTS OF THE PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION OF OHIO’S OFFICE OF THE FEDERAL ENERGY ADVOCATE,” November 16, 2020. • Lack of input from major electricity consumers, such as industrial facilities. See, e.g., “COMMENTS OF THE ELECTRICITY CONSUMERS RESOURCE COUNCIL (ELCON),” November 16, 2020. • Leakage of both emissions and cost. See, e.g., “COMMENTS OF PJM INTERCONNECTION, L.L.C.,” November 16, 2020. • Loss of fuel-secure resources due to coal retirements. See, e.g., “INITIAL COMMENTS OF AMERICA’S POWER,” November 16, 2020. • Misimpression that the Commission has the authority to influence states to adopt carbon pricing. See, e.g., “Institute for Energy Research, FERC Comment, Docket No. AD20-14-000, Carbon Pricing in Organized Wholesale Electricity Markets.” • Need for a national carbon-pricing program to avoid a patchwork of state programs. See, e.g., “COMMENTS OF CRICKET VALLEY ENERGY CENTER, LLC, Re: Notice of Proposed Policy Statement, Carbon Pricing in Wholesale Electricity Markets, dated Oct. 15, 2020,” November 16, 2020. • Need for transmission investment to accommodate carbon pricing. See, e.g., “INITIAL COMMENTS OF INTERNATIONAL TRANSMISSION COMPANY d/b/a, ITCTRANSMISSION, MICHIGAN ELECTRIC TRANSMISSION COMPANY, LLC, ITC MIDWEST LLC, AND ITC GREAT PLAINS, LLC,” November 16, 2020. - 3 - • Need to expand carbon pricing to non-ISO/RTO regions to avoid leakage. See, e.g., “Utah Department of Commerce and Utah Division of Public Utilities, Comments Regarding Carbon Pricing in Wholesale Electricity Markets, Docket No. AD20-14-000, November 16, 2020.” • Non-discriminatory treatment of both ISO/RTO and non-ISO/RTO regions to ensure a level playing field. See, e.g., “COMMENTS OF MIDCONTINENT INDEPENDENT SYSTEM OPERATOR INC.,” November 16, 2020. • Possible adverse impacts on grid reliability caused by coal retirements. See, e.g., “INITIAL COMMENTS OF AMERICA’S POWER,” November 16, 2020. • Possible adverse impacts on grid resilience. See, e.g., “COMMENTS OF CALPINE CORPORATION ON PROPOSED POLICY STATEMENT,” November 16, 2020. (Note that America’s Power and Members of Congress have urged the Commission on multiple occasions to act on its almost three-year-old resilience docket. By comparison, the Commission issued its Proposed Policy Statement within six weeks after convening its Technical Conference on Carbon Pricing in Organized Wholesale Markets.) • Possible withdrawal of states and/or electricity generators from ISOs/RTOs that decide to price carbon. See, e.g., “COMMENTS OF MIDCONTINENT INDEPENDENT SYSTEM OPERATOR INC.,” November 16, 2020. • Premature retirement of coal-fired generation. See, e.g., “INITIAL COMMENTS OF AMERICA’S POWER,” November 16, 2020. • Usurping of state authority by the Commission and lack of cooperative federalism. See, e.g., “Utah Department of Commerce and Utah Division of Public Utilities, Comments Regarding Carbon Pricing in Wholesale Electricity Markets, Docket No. AD20-14-000, November 16, 2020.” The Commission has talented staff to evaluate these and other issues. However, any Commission actions taken prematurely may be incompatible with new Administration policies. CARBON EMISSIONS IN PERSPECTIVE FERC properly acknowledged that it is not an environmental regulator. However, the purpose of setting a carbon price is to reduce carbon emissions for environmental reasons. Therefore, it follows that encouraging consideration of carbon pricing means encouraging
Load more

Recommended publications
  • For Health and Climate: Retiring Coal-Fired Electricity and Promoting Sustainable Energy Transition in Developing Countries Author: by Donald P
    For Health and Climate: Retiring Coal-Fired Electricity and Promoting Sustainable Energy Transition in Developing Countries Author: By Donald P. Kanak1 Abstract • Coal fuels 38% of global electricity and there are plans to build over 1,000 new coal-fired power plants, mostly in the developing countries with growing energy needs. • Carbon emissions from those current and planned power plants will prevent the world from achieving the 1.5⁰C climate scenarios that call for a reduction of coal-fired electricity from 38% to 9% of total generation by 2030 and to 0.6% by 2050. • ESG initiatives are resulting in leading global financial institutions exiting and/or avoiding new investments in coal, but other buyers are stepping in; thus, many existing and planned coal assets are likely, without intervention, to continue to operate well beyond 2030-2050. • Proposed solution: Coal Retirement Mechanisms (CRMs) financial facilities that purchase coal-fired power plants in developing countries from existing owners and retire the plants in 10-15 years vs. typical 30-40 years of operation. Funds paid to current owners of coal-fired power plants to be recycled into new greenfield sustainable power. • The CRM’s capital would come from developed countries, multilateral development banks, climate funds and/or blended finance. Those investors would be paid back from the power plants’ operating revenues, but at a lower rate of return reflecting today’s low costs of funds. Supplementary revenue from carbon credits, transfer of fossil fuel subsidies, or energy surcharges might be used to meet or accelerate the retirement date. • Parallel to the CRM, a Sustainable Energy Transition Mechanism (SETM) will provide host countries with both financial and technical assistance to accelerate transition towards renewables (including storage, transmission, and distribution infrastructure).
    [Show full text]
  • Europe Gas Tracker Report 2021
    Europe Gas Tracker Report 2021Mason Inman, Greig Aitken, Scott Zimmerman EUROPE GAS TRACKER REPORT 2021 Global ABOUT GLOBAL PERMISSION FOR NONCOMMERCIAL USE Energy ENERGY MONITOR This publication may be reproduced in whole or in part and Monitor Global Energy Monitor (GEM) is a in any form for educational or nonprofit purposes without network of researchers developing collaborative informa- special permission from the copyright holders, provided tional resources on fossil fuels and alternatives. Current that acknowledgement of the source is made. No use of this projects include: publication may be made for resale or other commercial ■ Global Coal Plant Tracker purpose without the written permission of the copyright holders. Copyright © April 2021 by Global Energy Monitor. ■ Global Fossil Infrastructure Tracker ■ Europe Gas Tracker FURTHER RESOURCES ■ Global Gas Plant Tracker The Europe Gas Tracker includes project-level data in ■ Global Coal Mine Tracker spreadsheets, methodology notes, and an interactive global ■ Global Steel Plant Tracker map. To obtain primary data from the Europe Gas Tracker, ■ The Gas Index please use our request form. ■ CoalWire newsletter ■ GEM.wiki energy wiki ABOUT THE COVER Cover photo: Construction of the Krk LNG Terminal in ABOUT THE EUROPE GAS TRACKER Croatia. Courtesy of Balkan Investigative Reporting Network. The Europe Gas Tracker is an online database that identifies, maps, describes, and categorizes gas infrastructure in the European Union and surrounding nations, including gas pipelines, liquified natural gas (LNG) terminals, gas-fired power plants, and gas fields. Developed by Global Energy Monitor, the tracker uses footnoted wiki pages to document each project. AUTHORS Mason Inman is Oil and Gas Program Director, Greig Aitken is Research Analyst, Scott Zimmerman is Researcher at Global Energy Monitor.
    [Show full text]
  • Passing Gas: Why Renewables Are the Future
    PASSING GAS: WHY RENEWABLES ARE THE FUTURE CLIMATECOUNCIL.ORG.AU Thank you for supporting the Climate Council. The Climate Council is an independent, crowd-funded organisation providing quality information on climate change to the Australian public. Published by the Climate Council of Australia Limited. ISBN: 978-1-922404-21-3 (print) 978-1-922404-22-0 (digital) Andrew Stock © Climate Council of Australia Ltd 2020. Climate Councillor This work is copyright the Climate Council of Australia Ltd. All material contained in this work is copyright the Climate Council of Australia Ltd except where a third party source is indicated. Climate Council of Australia Ltd copyright material is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Australia License. To view a copy of this license visit http://creativecommons.org.au. Greg Bourne You are free to copy, communicate and adapt the Climate Council of Climate Councillor Australia Ltd copyright material so long as you attribute the Climate Council of Australia Ltd and the authors in the following manner: Passing Gas: Why Renewables are the Future. Authors: Andrew Stock, Greg Bourne, Will Steffen and Tim Baxter. The authors would like to thank our two reviewers, Dr Hugh Saddler and one anonymous reviewer who donated their time of reviewing this report. Professor Will Steffen Climate Councillor — Cover image: Climate Council. Jeeralang A Power Station in Victoria. This report is printed on 100% recycled paper. Tim Baxter Senior Researcher (Climate Solutions) facebook.com/climatecouncil [email protected] twitter.com/climatecouncil climatecouncil.org.au CLIMATE COUNCIL I Contents Key findings .....................................................................................................................................................................................ii 1. Introduction: Gas has no place in Australia’s economic recovery, or climate safe future ................................1 2.
    [Show full text]
  • HIA South Korea April 2021
    Contents Contents 1 Key Findings 4 Introduction 5 The State of Coal Power and Air Pollution in South Korea 6 Scope and Purpose of the Report 8 RESULTS 10 Emissions Load & Air Quality 10 Toxic Deposition 11 Health Impacts 13 Cumulative Cost of Coal Dependence, Past & Future 18 Recommendations 21 References 22 Appendix 1: Methods & Materials 24 Appendix 2: Stack Properties and Emissions Data 27 Appendix 3: Per-plant Results 30 About CREA The Centre for Research on Energy and Clean Air is an independent research organisation focused on revealing the trends, causes, and health impacts, as well as the solutions to air pollution. CREA uses scientific data, research and evidence to support the efforts of governments, companies and campaigning organizations worldwide in their efforts to move towards clean energy and clean air. We believe that effective research and communication are the key to successful policies, investment decisions and advocacy efforts. CREA was founded in December 2019 in Helsinki, Finland and has staff in several Asian and European countries. Authors: Lauri Myllyvirta Isabella Suarez Andreas Anhäuser Contributors: Minwoo Son The maps used in this document were prepared in accordance with South Korean regulation. CREA is politically independent. The designations employed and the presentation of the material on maps contained in this report do not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever concerning the legal status of any country, territory, city or area or of its authorities, or concerning the delimitation of its frontiers or boundaries. Time for a Check Up: The Health and Economic Cost of Coal Dependence in South Korea’s Power Mix Key Findings ● Exposure to air pollution from coal-fired power plants (CFPPs) in South Korea is estimated to have caused approximately 9,5001 premature deaths since 1983, costing approximately USD 16 billion in healthcare and welfare expenditures, as well as loss of productivity and life expectancy.
    [Show full text]
  • Transition to Nowhere: Liquefied Natural Gas
    Cheryl McNamara, Media and Advocacy Coordinator, KAIROS Canada ● 416-875-0097 (C) ● [email protected] Transition to nowhere: Liquefied Natural Gas Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG) is lauded as a transitional fuel, a replacement to coal in a bid to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions that are heating and destabilizing the biosphere. Speaking to an international audience at the opening of Gastech 2020 on September 7, Natural Resources Minister Seamus O'Regan touted Canadian LNG as sustainable and competitive. LNG is a gas, primarily composed of methane, that has been cooled down to liquid form for ease and safety of non-pressurized storage or transport. The Canadian government has gone so far as to pursue a provision in the Paris climate accord to gain emissions credits, claiming that LNG exports to Asian countries will help reduce air pollution there. Unfortunately, these claims are backed by little substance. LNG development will not only prevent Canada from meeting its Paris emission reduction targets, it may also be an economic non-starter. The decreased demand for fossil fuels that preceded the COVID-19 pandemic is due in part to cheaper clean energy alternatives that are on the rise. Credit: Canaport LNG terminal in Saint LNG’s Carbon Footprint John, NB. “Climate change is principally caused by extracting carbon from below ground and putting it into the atmosphere. That Canada is now trying to get emissions credit for digging even deeper into fossil fuel production is preposterous.” LNG’s Big Lie, Marc Lee, Senior Economist at the CCPA’s BC Office Gas power plants emit 50 to 60 percent less carbon dioxide than coal plants so, the argument goes, Canada has a golden opportunity to exploit this natural resource and help the world mitigate the climate crisis.
    [Show full text]
  • Emissions Gap
    Emissions Gap Emissions Gap Report 2020 © 2020 United Nations Environment Programme ISBN: 978-92-807-3812-4 Job number: DEW/2310/NA This publication may be reproduced in whole or in part and in any form for educational or non-profit services without special permission from the copyright holder, provided acknowledgement of the source is made. The United Nations Environment Programme would appreciate receiving a copy of any publication that uses this publication as a source. No use of this publication may be made for resale or any other commercial purpose whatsoever without prior permission in writing from the United Nations Environment Programme. Applications for such permission, with a statement of the purpose and extent of the reproduction, should be addressed to the Director, Communication Division, United Nations Environment Programme, P. O. Box 30552, Nairobi 00100, Kenya. Disclaimers The designations employed and the presentation of the material in this publication do not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of the United Nations Environment Programme concerning the legal status of any country, territory or city or its authorities, or concerning the delimitation of its frontiers or boundaries. For general guidance on matters relating to the use of maps in publications please go to http://www.un.org/Depts/Cartographic/english/ htmain.htm Mention of a commercial company or product in this document does not imply endorsement by the United Nations Environment Programme or the authors. The use of information from this document for publicity or advertising is not permitted. Trademark names and symbols are used in an editorial fashion with no intention on infringement of trademark or copyright laws.
    [Show full text]
  • Pipeline Bubble NORTH AMERICA IS BETTING OVER $1 TRILLION on a RISKY FOSSIL INFRASTRUCTURE BOOM
    Pipeline Bubble NORTH AMERICA IS BETTING OVER $1 TRILLION ON A RISKY FOSSIL INFRASTRUCTURE BOOM Ted Nace, Lydia Plante, and James Browning PIPELINE BUBBLE Global ABOUT GLOBAL PERMISSIONS/COPYRIGHT Energy ENERGY MONITOR This publication may be reproduced in whole or in part and Monitor Global Energy Monitor (for- in any form for educational or nonprofit purposes without merly CoalSwarm) is a network special permission from the copyright holders, provided of researchers developing collaborative informational that acknowledgement of the source is made. No use of this resources on fossil fuels and energy alternatives. Current publication may be made for resale or other commercial projects include the Global Coal Plant Tracker, the Global purpose without the written permission of the copyright Fossil Infrastructure Tracker, the CoalWire newsletter, and holder. the CoalSwarm and FrackSwarm wiki portals. Copyright © April 2019 by Global Energy Monitor. Cover photo courtesy of Pixabay. ABOUT THE GLOBAL FOSSIL INFRASTRUCTURE TRACKER The Global Fossil Infrastructure Tracker is an online data- FURTHER RESOURCES base that identifies, maps, describes, and categorizes oil For additional data on proposed and existing pipelines, and gas pipelines and oil, gas, and coal terminals. Devel- see Summary Data at http://ggon.org/fossil-tracker/, which oped by Global Energy Monitor, the tracker uses footnoted provides over 30 tables providing results from the Global wiki pages to document each plant. For further details, see Fossil Infrastructure Tracker (GFPT), broken down by “ Methodology” at http://ggon.org/fossil-tracker/. nation and region. To obtain primary data from the GFIT, contact Ted Nace ([email protected]). AUTHORS Ted Nace is Executive Director of Global Energy Monitor.
    [Show full text]
  • Environmentalism and World Politics
    Open Access Austin Environmental Sciences Mini Review Environmentalism and World Politics Jan-Erik Lane* Professor Emeritus, University of Geneva, Switzerland Abstract *Corresponding author: Jan-Erik Lane, Professor President Trump states that national interests call for more burning of fossil Emeritus, University of Geneva, Switzerland fuels, e.g. the acceptance of large scale fracking. National interests are the main reason why the 20 most polluting countries resist the COP efforts for global Received: February 19, 2020; Accepted: February 25, coordination at any price. What is national interest: economic development/ 2020; Published: March 03, 2020 growth, military power, political prestige, revenge for colonialism? Global warming and its enormous dangers should be debated on the preponderance of evidence only. Keywords: Schneider’s theorem; Hawking’s Irreversibility; The damocles sword of energy against temperature rise; Eliminating coal power Introduction Table 1: Top 20 Energy consuming, CO2 emitting, and coal power producing nations of the world Enerdata 2019, Crippa et al. 2019. Top 20 Energy Flamboyant Prime Minister of Great Britain has started Top 20 CO2 Emitting Top 20 producers of Consuming Countries preparations for COP26, scheduled to be held in Glasgow ultimo Countries 2018 coal energy 2019 2018 2020. The UN Conference of the Parties have convened since 1995 China China China under the auspices of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change in the effort to create a governance mechanism United States United States United States in relation to global warming. Recently, international governance India India India coordination has met with skepticism and criticism from civil society Russia Russia Russia around the world, supporting environmentalism.
    [Show full text]
  • Nervous Money
    Nervous Money GLOBAL LNG TERMINALS UPDATE 2021Lydia Plante and Ted Nace GLOBAL ENERGY MONITOR NERVOUS MONEY Global AUTHORS Energy Lydia Plante is a Research Analyst at Global Energy Monitor. Monitor Ted Nace is Executive Director at Global Energy Monitor. ABOUT GLOBAL ENERGY MONITOR Global Energy Monitor (GEM) develops and shares informa- EDITING AND PRODUCTION tion on energy projects in support of the worldwide move- Edited by Mason Inman and James Browning. Design by ment for clean energy. Current projects include the Global Charlene Will and Mimi Heft. Additional design and page Coal Mine Tracker, Global Coal Plant Tracker, Global Fossil layout by David Van Ness. Infrastructure Tracker, Europe Gas Tracker, CoalWire news- letter, Global Gas Plant Tracker, Global Renewable Power ABOUT THE COVER Tracker, Global Steel Plant Tracker, Latin America Energy Photo of LNG tanker in Tokyo Bay. Copyright (c) Bill Chizek, Portal, and GEM.wiki. 2019. Courtesy of Getty Images. ABOUT THE GLOBAL FOSSIL INFRASTRUCTURE PERMISSIONS/COPYRIGHT TRACKER (GFIT) This publication may be reproduced in whole or in part and The Global Fossil Infrastructure Tracker is an online data- in any form for educational or nonprofit purposes without base that identifies, maps, describes, and categorizes oil and special permission from the copyright holders, provided gas pipelines and terminals. Originally released by GEM in that acknowledgement of the source is made. No use of this January 2019 and updated twice annually, the tracker uses publication may be made for resale or other commercial footnoted wiki pages to document each pipeline or termi- purpose without the written permission of the copyright nal.
    [Show full text]
  • Critical Junctions on the Journey to 1.5°C: the Decisive Decade
    1 Critical Junctions on the Journey to 1.5°C: The Decisive Decade CLIMATE Strategies 2 AUTHORS Lead Author • Joyashree Roy (India/Thailand), Sustainable Energy Transitions Programme, Asian Institute of Technology, Thailand & Department of Economics, Jadavpur University, India – Member of Climate Strategies Authors • Nandini Das (India), Global Change Programme-Jadavpur University • Duke Ghosh (India), Global Change Research • Suzana Kahn-Ribeiro (Brazil), Federal University of Rio de Janeiro - UFRJ • Manaswita Konar (India/UK/USA), World Resources Institute • Omar Masera (Mexico), UNAM • Narasimha Rao (India/USA), Yale University & IIASA • Shreya Some (India), Global Centre for Environment and Energy, Ahmedabad University & Department of Economics-Jadavpur University • Richard Wood (Australia), NTNU Contributors Climate Strategies • Adriana Chavarría – Project manager, reviewer and editor • Julie-Anne Hogbin – Reviewer and editor • Andrzej Błachowicz – Project advisor and reviewer • Sascha Brandt – Reviewer • Olivia Crowe – Project contributor Other contributors • Joanna Depledge, Member of Climate Strategies and CEENRG Fellow, University of Cambridge – Reviewer • Claudia Delpero – Editor Design: • Marcela Martínez Cite this report as: Roy, J. et al. (2021). Critical Junctions on the Journey to 1.5°C: The Decisive Decade. London/The Hague: Climate Strategies. This report was commissioned as part of the Mission 2020 campaign to help chart the path forward in the Decisive Decade. It aims to highlight the key steps needed - building on what is already articulated - for action over the decade ahead so that we might keep temperature rise within the goals outlined in the Paris Climate Agreement and create a healthier, safer, more resilient world. In December 2020, the Mission 2020 campaign released the ‘Prelude to a Great Regeneration’, which shines a light on the characteristics we’ll need to embody to ensure success.
    [Show full text]
  • 2021 Regional Trends Report
    2021 REGIONAL TRENDS REPORT Shaping a Sustainable Energy Future in Asia and the Pacific A GREENER, MORE RESILIENT AND INCLUSIVE ENERGY SYSTEM The shaded areas of the map indicate ESCAP members and associate members.* The Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific (ESCAP) serves as the United Nations’ regional hub, promoting cooperation among countries to achieve inclusive and sustainable development. The largest regional intergovernmental platform with 53 member States and 9 associate members, ESCAP has emerged as a strong regional think-tank offering countries sound analytical products that shed insight into the evolving economic, social and environmental dynamics of the region. The Commission’s strategic focus is to deliver on the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, which it does by reinforcing and deepening regional cooperation and integration to advance connectivity, financial cooperation and market integration. The research and analysis undertaken by ESCAP, coupled with its policy advisory services, capacity building and technical assistance to governments aims to support countries’ sustainable and inclusive development ambitions. Information and statistics presented in this publication include only those member and associate member States located in the Asia-Pacific region. *The designations employed and the presentation of material on this map do not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of the Secretariat of the United Nations concerning the legal status of any country, territory, city or
    [Show full text]
  • Coal Mine Proposals 2021
    Deep Trouble TRACKING GLOBAL COAL MINE PROPOSALS 2021Ryan Driskell Tate, Christine Shearer, and Andiswa Matikinca COAL MINE PROPOSALS 2021 ABOUT THE COVER AUTHORS The cover photo shows the Bengalla coal mine in Australia. Ryan Driskell Tate is the Research Analyst for the Global Coal Photo by D. Sewell, licensed under CC by 2.0. Mine Tracker at Global Energy Monitor. Christine Shearer is the Program Director for Coal at Global Energy Monitor. Andiswa Matikinca is the Project Manager for #MineAlert Global ABOUT GLOBAL Energy ENERGY MONITOR at Oxpeckers. Monitor Global Energy Monitor (GEM) devel- ops and shares information on energy projects in support of EDITING AND PRODUCTION the worldwide movement for clean energy. Current projects Edited by Bob Burton and James Browning, Global Energy include the Global Coal Mine Tracker, Global Coal Plant Monitor. Design by Charlene Will and Mimi Heft. Additional Tracker, Global Fossil Infrastructure Tracker, Global Steel design and page layout by David Van Ness. Plant Tracker, Europe Gas Tracker, CoalWire newsletter, Global Gas Plant Tracker, Global Registry of Fossil Fuels, PERMISSIONS/COPYRIGHT Latin America Energy Portal, and GEM.wiki. For more infor- This publication may be reproduced in whole or in part and mation, visit www.globalenergymonitor.org. in any form for educational or nonprofit purposes without special permission from the copyright holders, provided ABOUT that acknowledgement of the source is made. No use of this OXPECKERS publication may be made for resale or other commercial The Oxpeckers Center for Investigative Environmental Jour- purpose without the written permission of the copyright nalism combines traditional reporting with data analysis and holders.
    [Show full text]